Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1944

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ramesh Singh Thakur, Judicial Member, Anjali Bhawra, Administrative Member
Krishan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A.NO.060/563/2024|O.A. No. 060/980/2023

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sh. Dhiraj Chawla
For the Respondents: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Sr. CGSC

Group B postal employees entitled to non-functional Grade Pay Rs.5400/- after 4 years regular service in Rs.4800/- under CCS(RP) Rules 2008, irrespective of grant via promotion or MACP; executive instructions cannot override statutory rules; parity mandated for similarly situated.

Headnote:(A) CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 - Part-C, Section-II of First Schedule and Clause 1(x)(e) of Resolution dated 29.08.2008 - Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Department of Posts Group ‘B’ officers - Non-functional Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- in PB-2 - Entitlement after completion of four years regular service in Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- - Held, benefit available irrespective of whether Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- granted through promotion or MACP/ACP Scheme - No restrictive stipulation in rules requiring promotion to specific post - Executive instructions cannot override statutory rules under Article 309 - Entitlement flows from completion of four years service in Grade Pay, not post nomenclature - Parity under Articles 14 and 16 mandated for similarly situated employees - Precedents binding across benches - Impugned rejection order quashed - Direction to grant Grade Pay Rs.5400/- w.e.f. date of completion of four years in Rs.4800/- with pay refixation, increment under Rule 13(1), arrears, pension revision and interest. (Paras 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22)

(B) Pay Structure - Non-functional upgradation - Cannot be denied on ground of no vacancy or actual promotion - Linked solely to regular service duration in specified Grade Pay - Consistent judicial view mandates uniform application to all eligible employees. (Paras 17, 18)

Facts of the case:
Retired Group ‘B’ postal employees granted Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- under MACP Scheme in PB-2 completed four years regular service therein. Claim for non-functional Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- rejected vide order dated 25.04.2024 on ground that benefit restricted to regular promotees to specific posts like Superintendent (Posts), not applicable to MACP assessees, relying on subsequent OMs.

Findings of Court:
Impugned order quashed. Respondents directed to grant Grade Pay Rs.5400/- w.e.f. date each applicant completed four years in Rs.4800/-, refix pay with one increment u/R.13(1) CCS(RP) Rules, 2008, extend consequential benefits including arrears, pension/retiral dues revision with interest at GPF rate, within three months.

Issues: Whether employees completing four years regular service in Grade Pay Rs.4800/- under MACP entitled to non-functional Grade Pay Rs.5400/- per CCS(RP) Rules, 2008; whether benefit can be restricted to regular promotees or prior litigants; validity of rejection based on executive OMs post-rules notification.

Ratio Decidendi: Completion of four years regular service in Grade Pay Rs.4800/- entitles to non-functional Rs.5400/- irrespective of acquisition mode (promotion/MACP); rules contain no exclusion for MACP; executive cannot impose restrictions; similarly situated employees entitled to parity; earlier bench decision on identical facts binding.

Result: Original Application allowed.

Table of Content
1. parties and advocates identified (Para 1 , 2)
2. reliefs sought against impugned order (Para 3)
3. macp implementation and service facts (Para 4)
4. sixth cpc recommendations and rules (Para 5)
5. applicants' entitlement claim post-4 years (Para 6)
6. precedents granting similar relief (Para 7 , 8)
7. legal notice and impugned rejection (Para 9 , 10)
8. applicants filed no rejoinder (Para 11)
9. hearing and pleadings reviewed (Para 12)
10. applicants' submissions on resolution (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
11. prior bench judgment reproduced (Para 16)
12. core issue framed for determination (Para 17)
13. non-functional gp entitlement irrespective of mode (Para 18 , 19)
14. same bench precedent followed (Para 20)
15. no discrimination under articles 14/16 (Para 21)
16. impugned order quashed, benefits directed (Para 22)
17. no order as to costs (Para 23)

O R D E R

Per: RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J):

1. This Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief(s):-

(i) To set aside the impugned order dated 25.04.2024 (Annexure A-1) whereby the respondents have rejected the claim of the applicant for the grant of Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- on the ground that officers holding the post of Income Tax Officers/Superintendents, Appraisers 9Customs and Central Excise) etc. and in the Department of Posts holding the posts of Superintendent (Posts) were eligible for grant of non-functional Grade Pay of Rs.5400/-after 4 years of service in the grade pay of Rs. 4800/- whereas it is a settled law that the employees having rendered regular service of 4 years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- received under MACP/ACP Scheme is eligible for the Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in terms of the Part -C Section-ll of the 1st Schedule of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, (Annexure A-2).

(ii) To direct the Respondent no. 2 to grant the applicants the Grade Pay of Rs.5400 w.e.f. the date of completion of regular service of 4 years in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- (pre-revised Rs.7500-12000) in terms of the Part -C Section- ll of the 1st Schedule of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, (Annexure A- 2) and consequently refix their pay alongwith one increment as laid down in Rule 13 (1) CCS RP Rules, 2008 and retiral dues as well as pension and release arrears thereof forthwith with interest @ 18% p.a. as already granted to similarly situated employees vide orders Annexure A-3 to Annexure A-4.

2. The facts as submitted in the Original Application are that In pursuance of DG Posts, New Delhi letter No. 4- 7/(MACPS)/2009-PCC dated 18.09.2009, implementing the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) with effect from 01.09.2008, the competent authority granted 2nd/3rd MACP to the applicants on completion of 20/30 years of continuous regular service in Pay Band-2 (Rs. 9,300–34,800) with Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/-. The applicants were placed in Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/- on different dates and each completed four years of regular service thereafter on respective dates. Several applicants retired between 30.04.2013 and 31.03.2024 after completion of the requisite period.

3. The Sixth Central Pay Commission was constituted vide Resolution dated 05.10.2006 (as amended on 07.12.2006 and 08.08.2007) and submitted its report on 24.03.2008. The Government of India accepted its recommendations vide Resolution No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 29.08.2008, published in the Gazette of India. Clause (iv) of the Resolution prescribed the method of pay fixation by multiplying the basic pay as on 01.01.2006 by 1.86 and adding the applicable Grade Pay. Clause (x)(e) specifically provided that Group ‗B‘ officers of the Department of Posts, Revenue, etc., shall be granted Grade Pay of Rs. 5,400/- in PB-2 on a non-functional basis after completion of four years of regular service in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4,800/-. The revised pay structure was incorporated in the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 notified vide GSR 622 (E) dated 29.08.2008 with retrospective effect from 01.0

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1944

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALRamesh Singh Thakur, Judicial Member, Anjali Bhawra, Administrative MemberKrishan Sharma – AppellantVersusUnion of India – RespondentO.A.NO.060/563/2024|O.A. No. 060/980/2023

Group B postal employees entitled to non-functional Grade Pay Rs.5400/- after 4 years regular service in Rs.4800/- under CCS(RP) Rules 2008, irrespective of grant via promotion or MACP; executive instructions cannot override statutory rules; parity mandated for similarly situated.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ramesh Singh Thakur, Judicial Member, Anjali Bhawra, Administrative Member
Krishan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A.NO.060/563/2024|O.A. No. 060/980/2023